From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10624 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2016 21:01:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 10603 invoked by uid 89); 27 Jun 2016 21:01:16 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_SEMBACKSCATTER,URIBL_RED autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=Ping, hadnt, hadn't, H*MI:2F43 X-HELO: mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (HELO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com) (148.163.158.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:00:57 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.11/8.16.0.11) with SMTP id u5RKsJMG009521 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:00:54 -0400 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com (e32.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.150]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 23snxucnsa-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:00:54 -0400 Received: from localhost by e32.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:00:53 -0600 Received: from d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.202.177) by e32.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:00:33 -0600 X-IBM-Helo: d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com X-IBM-MailFrom: wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com Received: from b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.20]) by d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DB571FF004B; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:00:16 -0600 (MDT) Received: from b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.232]) by b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id u5RL0Wsk65601556; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:00:32 -0700 Received: from b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF596E038; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:00:32 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [9.80.207.16] (unknown [9.80.207.16]) by b03ledav001.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30916E035; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:00:30 -0600 (MDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: Ping Re: Implement C _FloatN, _FloatNx types [version 3] From: Bill Schmidt In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:20:00 -0000 Cc: GCC Patches , fortran@gcc.gnu.org, jason@redhat.com, richard.earnshaw@arm.com, nickc@redhat.com, ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com, marcus.shawcroft@arm.com, dje.gcc@gmail.com, segher@kernel.crashing.org, meissner@linux.vnet.ibm.com, murphyp@linux.vnet.ibm.com, bje@gnu.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: To: Joseph Myers X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 16062721-0004-0000-0000-00000FC88226 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 16062721-0005-0000-0000-0000768FB2A6 Message-Id: <6016E66D-2F43-4940-8289-C7AFA90112C6@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2016-06-27_13:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1604210000 definitions=main-1606270211 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-06/txt/msg01833.txt.bz2 Hi Joseph, > On Jun 27, 2016, at 12:21 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > Ping. This patch > is pending > review. Built-in functions are available in the followup patch > . I can't ack the patch, but the rs6000 bits of your original patch look fine. I didn't mean to ask you to change those -- I hadn't read the patch and was just commenting on your description of the patch, and I realize now that I wasn't careful in my use of language. I apologize for the miscommunication there. We should keep the check on FLOAT128_IEEE_P to determine which mode is __float128 for now, until the whole issue of two 128-bit floats is behind us. Best regards, Bill > > -- > Joseph S. Myers > joseph@codesourcery.com >